Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 665 (KAR)

Veeraraju, Raichur v. Veeraraju, Raichur

2009-08-24

N.K.PATIL, RAVI MALIMATH

body2009
Judgment :- 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 19.8.2003 passed in M.V.C.No.16/2000 on the file of the Prl. District & Sessions Judge (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Raichur, (for short, hereinafter referred to as ‘claims tribunal’), whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,20,000/-with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till 8.2.2000 and from 22.9.2002 till its realisation. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded, the appellant has presented the instant appeal. 2. It is the case of the appellant that on 07/11/1998 at about 00.30 hours (night), the claimant was going on a motor cycle bearing No. KA-37/E.2550 on left side of the road at Basveshwar Camp and at that time, a tempo bearing No. KA-37/2776 came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed to the claimant and to his motor cycle, due to which, claimant fell down and sustained injuries all over his body and fractures on his leg and his motor cycle was completely damaged. Immediately, the claimant was shifted to Government Hospital Gangavati and thereafter he was treated at Adarsha Health Centre Bellary and Malya Hospital Bangalore, and finally he has been treated in Miraj Hospital. On account of the injuries sustained in the accident he filed the claim petition praying compensation of Rs.45,00,000/-for the injuries sustained by him before the Claims Tribunal. The Tribunal after hearing and after considering the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant has allowed the claim petition in part awarding a sum of Rs.2,20,000/-with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till 8.2.2000 and from 22.9.2002 till its realisation. The said amount awarded being inadequate, it requires enhancement by modifying the Judgment and Award passed by the Claims Tribunal, the appellant has presented the instant appeal. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that, the Claims Tribunal has committed a grave error in not awarding the just and reasonable compensation towards future loss of income, pain & suffering, nourishment and attendant chargers, loss of amenities and future medical expenses. Further it is specifically submitted that, the Claims Tribunal has committed a grave error in awarding Rs.42,000/-. Further it is specifically submitted that, the Claims Tribunal has committed a grave error in awarding Rs.42,000/-. As a matter of fact he has produced medical bill for Rs.1,42,000/-paid in Malya Hispital Bangalore, and remaining amount paid at Adarash Health Centre Bellary as well as Miraj hospital total of which comes to Rs.1,78,000/-and the same has not been looked for consideration. Therefore, he submits that the Judgment and Award passed by the Claims Tribunal is liable to be modified by enhancement of just and reasonable compensation. 4. Per contra the learned Counsel for the respondent-Insurance company inter alia has sought to substantiate the Judgment and Award passed by the Claims Tribunal as it does not call for any interference. He submitted that, amount awarded for future loss of income cannot be justifiable, no award towards loss of amenities, future medical expenses is awarded. He submitted that the appellant is entitled for sum of Rs.1,42,000/-towards amount spent by him in the Malya hospital. So far as amount spent in Adarsh Health Centre, Bellary and the appellant alleged to have taken treatment in Miraj hospital, cannot be taken into consideration. Except producing concocted bills, he has not produced any authenticated bills to establish that he was treated in the Adarsha Health Centre, Bellary and Miraj Hospital whereas he has produced bill so far as Malya Hospital, it is admissible. 5. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and respondents. 6. After careful consideration of the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and after evaluation of the original records including the judgment and award, the only question that arises for our consideration is:- Whether the impugned judgment and award passed by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and not awarding any amount towards loss of amenities and towards medical bills as admissible is justified in law? 7. It is not dispute that, on account of accident occurred on 7.11.1998 the appellant has sustained injuries. As per the evidence of the doctor-PW-2 he stated that he has not treated the claimant after the accident and as per the injuries mentioned in disability certificate Ex.P-7, he has assessed the disability and opined that there is disability of 90% on whole body. As per the evidence of the doctor-PW-2 he stated that he has not treated the claimant after the accident and as per the injuries mentioned in disability certificate Ex.P-7, he has assessed the disability and opined that there is disability of 90% on whole body. The injury of the claimant’s left leg is not curable one still the pus is oozing out from the place and it has to be amputed below the knee joint. Further he suggested that there is amputation but due to the financial crisis of the appellant he was not ready to undergo surgery. The cost of the amputation surgery is Rs.1,00,000/-to Rs.1,50,000/-. PW-2 further opined that the appellant’s right hip joint movements are gone for stiffness and only little (about 5 degrees) movements are possible and it is painful, at the same time right knee movements are also restricted due to severe degree of oestio orthrosis and the movements, only 15 to 20 degree are possible and they are painful and also there is a dissnesed artropy of the thigh muscles and as well as leg muscles. The claimant’s left leg become flack at lower 1/3rd of the leg due to lack of blood circulation. If it is not operated it may lead to Gangrin, and also the patient continuously bed ridden due to multiple injuries. Therefore, he is forced to lye on the bed which lead to bedsore complication and it is very difficult to treat the patient in future course. It is not in dispute that he had taken treatment for more than 45 days. The Claims Tribunal ought to have looked into the matter of duration of treatment in the light of the evidence of the doctor and to ought to have awarded just and reasonable amount towards pain and suffering. We feel it just and proper to award a sum of Rs.60,000/-towards pain and suffering. 8. The Tribunal further committed a grave error in awarding a sum of Rs.10,000/-towards conveyance. Taking into consideration, claimant was firstly admitted in Gangavathi hospital, thereafter at Adarsha Health Centre as referred to above and subsequently he was shifted to Malya Hospital, Bangalore and he was admitted as an inpatient and had taken more that 45 days treatment in different hospitals, some money was spent towards transportation, nourishment, attendant charges, we can award Rs.20,000/-towards conveyance, nourishment, attendance charges, accordingly we award Rs.20,000/-towards said heads. Further there is medical bill of Rs.1,45,000/-paid by the appellant towards Malya Hospital, Bangalore. So far other bills produced by the appellant it does not inspire confidence of this court for the reason that there is no exact date of admission in the hospital, how many days he was treated, etc and nothing is coming forth except some print out bills and manuscript bills, such bills cannot be accepted as rightly pointed out by the Tribunal. We have already placed reliance in respect of Adarsha Clinic, Bellary and Miraj Hospital and cannot be accepted. Accordingly, they are rejected. Therefore we award a sum of Rs.1,42,000/-towards medical bills and the same is rounded off to Rs.1,50,000/-. Accordingly we award a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-towards medical bills. 9. The Tribunal has taken Rs.5,000/-as income of the appellant. The said amount taken is just and reasonable. We do not find any justification to consider the submission of the counsel appearing for the appellant about income of the appellant. Except making oral submission and producing Pan Card, he has not produced copy of the income tax paid, payment of sales tax etc. Without producing any authenticated document, we cannot place reliance and accept the income as stated by the claimant in claim petition. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly arrived in taking income of the claimant as Rs.5,000/-per month which is just and reasonable. Accordingly we take Rs.5,000/-per month as income of the appellant. The appellant is aged 45 years, proper multiplied is 14 and not 12. the disability as per doctor evidence is 90% to the whole body but without any justification it cannot be accepted. In the light of the doctor’s evidence, we can take 50% as the whole body disability instead of 22%. Accordingly we award a sum of Rs.4,20,000/-towards loss of future income (Rs.5,000 x 12 x 14 x 50%)=Rs.4,20,000/-and Rs.10,000/-towards loss of income during treatment. 10. The Claims Tribunal further committed a grave error in awarding amount towards loss of amenities. In the light of the doctor’s evidence, we can take 50% as the whole body disability instead of 22%. Accordingly we award a sum of Rs.4,20,000/-towards loss of future income (Rs.5,000 x 12 x 14 x 50%)=Rs.4,20,000/-and Rs.10,000/-towards loss of income during treatment. 10. The Claims Tribunal further committed a grave error in awarding amount towards loss of amenities. It is not disputed that on account of the injuries sustained in the accident, the appellant has admitted in the hospital for more than 45 days, firstly at Gangavathi Hospital, there after in Adarash Health Centre, Bellary and in Malya Hospital Bangalore and taking into consideration the duration of treatment, disability of 50% to whole body, the appellant has got permanent disability on account of injuries sustained and which is permanent in nature. Therefore, taking into consideration the duration of treatment, pain and suffering we award sum of Rs.40,000/-towards loss of amenities and disability. 11. The Tribunal has committed an error in awarding less amount towards future medical expenses. It is not in dispute the appellant has been operated, and yet further one more operation is required. Keeping all these relevant factors we award a sum of Rs.10,000/-towards future medical expenses. 12. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal is allowed in part. The Judgment and award passed by the Claims Tribunal dated 19.8.2003 passed in M.V.C. 16/2000 on the file of Prl. District & Sessiong Judge (MACT), Raichur is here by modified as follows: 13. In the light of the facts and circumstances as stated above, we pass the following order: 1) Towards pain & suffering Rs. 60,000/- 2) Towards conveyance, nourishment, attendant charges Rs. 20,000/- 3) Towards future medical expenses Rs. 10,000/- 4) Towards medical bills Rs. 1,50,000/- 5) Towards loss of future income Rs. 4,20,000/- 6) Towards loss of amenities Rs. 40,000/- 7) Towards loss of income During treatment Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 7,10,000/- .(i) The appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part. .(ii) The appellant is held entitled to a total compensation of Rs.7,10,000/-against the total amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal Rs.2,20,000/-with interest at the rate of 6% for the enhanced amount from the date of petition till 8.2.2000 and from 22.9.2002 till the date of payment. (iii) The total enhanced amount comes to Rs.4,90,000/-. .(ii) The appellant is held entitled to a total compensation of Rs.7,10,000/-against the total amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal Rs.2,20,000/-with interest at the rate of 6% for the enhanced amount from the date of petition till 8.2.2000 and from 22.9.2002 till the date of payment. (iii) The total enhanced amount comes to Rs.4,90,000/-. Out of the enhanced amount, we order to deposit Rs.3,00,000/-in any Nationalised bank for a period of 5 years. The appellant is entitled to draw the accrued interest half yearly. .(iv) The remaining enhanced amount shall be released in favour of the appellant immediately after the deposit of the amount by the respondent. .(v) The respondent is directed to deposit the enhanced amount with interest within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Office is directed to draw up the award accordingly.